Too often we as Christians react to the feminist movement in one of two ways. We denounce it, using as a basis isolated scripture passages wrenched from their contexts. Or we ignore scripture, insisting that since our cultural situation is so different from that of biblical times, it is futile to seek biblical truth for this issue. Both of these approaches are in error. We must be faithful to scripture; we have no right to take a position contrary to it. An issue like feminism, however, raises immediate problems, for it is the kind of issue about which scripture does not always speak directly. This makes it much harder to deal with and raises hermeneutical questions.
In approaching scripture with regard to the issue of feminism, four hermeneutical principles must be followed. The first is that all relevant scripture must be used. Too long the church has looked only at those texts that suggest (on the surface, at least) the inferiority of women. It has failed to take seriously those passages that suggest equality (Galatians 3:28) and reciprocity between man and woman (1 Corinthians 7:3-5 and 11:11 and 12). It has looked primarily to the second creation account and slighted the first. It has noticed neither the aggressive woman lover in Song of Solomon nor the industrious manufacturer of Proverbs 31. It has ignored Jeremiah's curious word, "For the Lord has created a new thing on the earth: a woman protects a man" (31:22).
A second hermeneutical principle is that close attention must be paid to the historical context. When we consider the inferior status of women in Palestine in the first century, the meaning of New Testament passages involving women changes radically. This inferior status is evident in a Jewish daily prayer of thanksgiving: "Praised be God that He has not created me a woman." Women in Judaism were not allowed to witness in court; they were not expected to recite the Shema; they were not instructed in religion; and were not spoken to in public by men. This attitude toward women can be summed up in the Rabbinic saying, "It is well for those whose children are male, but ill for those whose children are female."
Women in the Kingdom
Against this historical context Jesus' attitude toward women is striking. Jesus revealed himself first to women after his resurrection. The disciples did not believe the women's report -- they thought the women were just dreaming. Paul does not include the women in his list of witnesses to the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:5-7). But the fact still remains: Jesus dared to appear first to women.
The incident of Jesus and the Samaritan woman at the well (John 4:7-30) has radical implications also. Here Jesus blatantly broke three customs: He, a man, talked to a woman in public. He, a Jew, spoke to a Samaritan. Finally, he instructed a woman in religion—a topic reserved only for men. When the disciples saw Jesus talking to this woman they were disturbed, but Jesus ignored them.
Even Paul's words and actions must have been shocking to his first-century friends. Despite his injunction at one point that women should be silent in the church, he freely recognized women as leaders at other points. In Philippians 4:2 he commended Euodia and Syntyche and called them "fellow workers." In 1 Corinthians he assumed women were prophesying and participating actively in worship. In Romans 16:7 he saluted Junia, a woman, as an apostle--although translators through the centuries have called her Junias and kinsman. In Romans 16:1 he called Phoebe a deacon and, according to the best translation, he said, "she was designated as a ruler over many by me."
A third hermeneutical principle is that theological principles that are universal and eternal must be distinguished from time-bound and particular practical injunctions. The church has always insisted on taking the theological principles seriously, although it has not felt compelled to strictly follow every practical injunction given in scripture.
Three practical injunctions that the church today feels no compulsion to enforce are: (1) 1 Timothy 5:23: "Use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments." (2) 1 Thessalonians 5:26: "Greet all the brethren with a holy kiss." (3) 1 Corinthians 11:5: "But any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled dishonors her head." Many specific injunctions about women are of this same type. Most widely quoted of these is 1 Corinthians 14:34: "Women should keep silence in the churches." This practical injunction was given to unlearned women at Corinth who were abusing their new freedom in Christ. They were speaking out of turn and causing chaos during worship. Paul called these women to order, as he did the people who were overly enthusiastic about speaking in tongues. His concern was order; it was not to silence women for all times. Paul realized that at Pentecost the Spirit was poured out to the daughters as well as the sons, and both were compelled to prophesy and speak in tongues (Acts 2:17). How could he then, silence the women in all churches throughout all ages? Surely Paul himself recognized the time-bound nature of his injunction for women to keep silent. The theological principles in scripture are, however, eternal and must be heeded by the church. The principle that applies to the relationship of men and women is the one that deals with the breaking down of distinctions between people who are living "in Christ." This principle is reiterated by both Jesus and Paul and is most clearly stated in Galatians 3:23-29.
Notice verse 28. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Here are three pairs of individuals who, under the law and sin, have unequal relationships, but in Christ there is no difference.
In a very literal way Paul obliterated distinctions between the first pair, the Jews and Greeks. He interacted freely with Gentiles; he insisted that circumcision was not a "must" and he never set Jews above Gentiles. He believed that in Christ they were equal and old distinctions were no longer valid.
In the case of the slave and freeman, Paul seems to have fluctuated in his belief and practice regarding their social equality. In spite of the theological principle stated here, and in spite of the fact that in Philemon he strongly urged that Onesimus be freed, Paul did not really insist on the literal freedom of slaves. It seems that the early church was not mature enough to accept this. In this case it was not ready for the real meat of the gospel. Since New Testament times, however, the church has required the freedom of slaves. It has in this instance gone beyond the New Testament church in its understanding of the theological principle of equality in Christ.
In the final pair, male and female, a similar situation exists. Although Paul insisted here that the old distinctions are no longer valid, he did not always carry this out when giving practical advice. Again in this case, the early church was not always ready for the real meat of the gospel. But today this is changing. Some are realizing that the truly Christian relationship between man and woman is equality--not just spiritual equality but literal equality in everyday matters.
A final hermeneutical principle is that Jesus Christ must be the starting point. Both the Old and New Testaments must be interpreted in the light of his words and actions. If we would dare to study carefully his words and actions we would find him to be the great Liberator of all oppressed people--women included. If we dare to call ourselves his disciples, we must not ignore his words and actions. We must treat all human beings as equals, as equals in all areas of life--in the office, in the church and even in the home. We must all strive to be submissive to each other. We must actively challenge those customs that encourage men to "prideful domination" and women to "passive irresponsibility," in the words of the Chicago Declaration. We must allow all people the freedom to develop their full potential and the freedom to choose--to choose to be secretaries or presidents, homemakers or providers. Sunday School teachers, or bishops. If we would do this, we would finally be realizing the true implication of the theological principle of "equality in Christ."
Lucille Sider Dayton was assistant director of the Urban Life Center in Chicago and a contributing editor for the Post American, the predecessor to Sojourners, when this article appeared.
Got something to say about what you're reading? We value your feedback!